I just checked the rules. There are no requirements for the organization type that can hold ".org.uk" or ".co.uk" domain. I guess that putting rules in place might be problematic as many Museums are "companies Limited By Guarantee", yet there are companies limited by guarantee that seem to "trade".
Dave Wade
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of Jeremy Ottevanger
> Sent: 04 December 2015 10:02
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Non-standard domain suffixes
>
> ".co.uk has always felt "for profit company" versus "fluffy not for profit"
> .org.uk ... but I know that's not a rule."
>
> I think actually that with .org.uk that sort of is a rule. Perhaps fluffy is not
> obligatory but IIRC Nominet to have some requirements for you to hold a
> .org.uk domain. The same is not the case with .org - no-one enforces any
> non-commercial status for these. Perhaps in the same way that no-one
> checks that companies with a .com have any commercial sense.
>
> I suppose I think about this stuff more than the average person, but your
> hierarchy is probably about right. That said, it's probably a lot less important
> than the story the site itself tells.
>
> Cheers, Jeremy
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of James Grimster
> Sent: 04 December 2015 09:46
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [MCG] Non-standard domain suffixes
>
> "I think this would be fascinating to test against the typical audience for any
> given site"
>
> I'd love to know if anyone has done this and published any results; right now
> I've two new projects where we are discussing just this. Do we go "the
> whole hog" and do a fully SSL subdomain of a local authority domain, i.e.
> https://archives.council.gov.uk which feels the most "trusted" , but might be
> overkill - we are also debating .co.uk or .org.uk as the primary domain.
> .co.uk has always felt "for profit company" versus "fluffy not for profit"
> .org.uk ... but I know that's not a rule.
>
> as a member of the public, which would you trust most to least ... .gov.uk >
> .org.uk > .co.uk ?
>
> cheers
>
> --
> James
>
>
>
> On 3 Dec 2015, at 17:25, James Morley wrote:
>
> > "At least with .org or .org.uk there's some sort of feeling that it's
> > a nice philanthropic organisation trying to do good"
> >
> > I think this would be fascinating to test against the typical audience
> > for any given site, just as it would also be to test a .com tld and
> > any possible negative perceptions that might elicit. If tld actually
> > has any impact at all!
> >
> > My overall view though is that any bespoke/niche urls must make 100%
> > sense, so if you're thinking a random organisational acronym and
> > .pictures then forget it. Unless of course you're the BBC, in which
> > case I'd grab it (from what I can see bbc.pictures is still free,
> > which has some interesting SEO possibilities, but maybe don't google
> > that one!)
> >
> > ---
> > James Morley
> > Work: labs.europeana.eu / [log in to unmask]
> > Personal: www.jamesmorley.net / @jamesinealing
> > Also: www.whatsthatpicture.com / @PhotosOfThePast
> >
> > On 2 December 2015 at 11:14, Annette Haworth
> > <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >> my immediate reaction was '.pictures - is that Disney/is it to be
> >> trusted/what is it?'
> >>
> >> At least with .org or .org.uk there's some sort of feeling that it's
> >> a nice philanthropic organisation trying to do good and which won't
> >> overcharge me so could you lose some trust with a non-standard domain
> >> suffix?
> >> Annette
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: Museums Computer Group [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of
> >> Frankie Roberto [[log in to unmask]]
> >> Sent: 02 December 2015 10:52
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Re: [MCG] Non-standard domain suffixes
> >>
> >> Mike wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, agree - this though is a new site (so no options for subdomains
> >> because there isn't a domain yet...) and what we're trying to figure
> >> out is how to take a loooooong organisational name and make it as
> >> easy to get to / find / remember / etc as possible..
> >>
> >> Does anyone actually type in full domain names any more? I suspect
> >> most people either search (given that most browsers have merged the
> >> URL & search
> >> inputs) or let their browser auto-complete the URL (if they've
> >> visited it before).
> >>
> >> I doubt the domain has any impact on Google ranking, but it might
> >> have some marginal affect on click-through from the search engine
> >> results pages, as any matching keywords in the domain are highlighted
> >> - but that's true regardless of whether the matching words are in the
> >> TLD or the domain or sub-domain.
> >>
> >> A .pictures domain sounds like a fun novelty, if nothing else... :)
> >>
> >> Frankie
> >>
> **********************************************************
> ******
> >> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> >> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> >> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> >>
> **********************************************************
> ******
> >>
> >>
> **********************************************************
> ******
> >> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> >> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> >> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> >>
> **********************************************************
> ******
> >>
> >
> >
> **********************************************************
> ******
> > website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> > Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> > [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> >
> **********************************************************
> ******
>
> **********************************************************
> ******
> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> **********************************************************
> ******
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------
> This email message has been delivered safely and archived online by
> Mimecast.
> For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------
>
> **********************************************************
> ******
> website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> **********************************************************
> ******
****************************************************************
website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
[un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************
|
